27 found
Order:
  1.  45
    Manipulation and the Causes of Evolution.Kenneth Reisman & Patrick Forber - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1113-1123.
    Evolutionary processes such as natural selection and random drift are commonly regarded as causes of population-level change. We respond to a recent challenge that drift and selection are best understood as statistical trends, not causes. Our reply appeals to manipulation as a strategy for uncovering causal relationships: if you can systematically manipulate variable A to bring about a change in variable B, then A is a cause of B. We argue that selection and drift can be systematically manipulated to produce (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   35 citations  
  2.  53
    Confirmation and Explaining How Possible.Patrick Forber - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 41 (1):32-40.
    Confirmation in evolutionary biology depends on what biologists take to be the genuine rivals. Investigating what constrains the scope of biological possibility provides part of the story: explaining how possible helps determine what counts as a genuine rival and thus informs confirmation. To clarify the criteria for genuine rivalry I distinguish between global and local constraints on biological possibility, and offer an account of how-possibly explanation. To sharpen the connection between confirmation and explaining how possible I discuss the view that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  3.  54
    On the Explanatory Roles of Natural Selection.Patrick Forber - 2005 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):329-342.
    Can selection explain why individuals have the traits they do? This question has generated significant controversy. I will argue that the debate encompasses two separable aspects, to detrimental effect: (1) the role of selection in explaining the origin and evolution of biological traits and (2) the implications this may have for explaining why individuals have the traits they do. (1) can be settled on the basis of evolutionary theory while (2) requires additional, extra-scientific assumptions. By making a distinction between traits (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  4.  49
    Historical Reconstruction: Gaining Epistemic Access to the Deep Past.Patrick Forber - 2011 - Philosophy and Theory in Biology 3 (20130604).
    Of the many tasks undertaken in science, one is striking both in its scope and the epistemic difficulties it faces: the reconstruction of the deep past. Such reconstruction provides the resources to successfully explain puzzling extant traces, from fossils to radiation signatures, often in the absence of extensive and repeatable observations—the hallmark of good epistemic support. Yet good explanations do not come for free. Evidence can fail, in practice or in principle, to support one hypothesis over another (underdetermination). And when (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  5. A Bargaining Game Analysis of International Climate Negotiations.John Basl, Ronald Sandler, Rory Smead & Patrick Forber - 2014 - Nature Climate Change 4:442-445.
    Climate negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change have so far failed to achieve a robust international agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Game theory has been used to investigate possible climate negotiation solutions and strategies for accomplishing them. Negotiations have been primarily modelled as public goods games such as the Prisoner’s Dilemma, though coordination games or games of conflict have also been used. Many of these models have solutions, in the form of equilibria, corresponding to possible (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6. Forever Beyond Our Grasp?Patrick Forber - 2007 - Biology and Philosophy 23 (1):135-141.
    Does science successfully uncover the deep structure of the natural world? Or are the depths forever beyond our epistemic grasp? Since the decline of logical positivism and logical empiricism, scientific realism has become the consensus view: of course our scientific theories apprehend the deep structure of the world. What else could explain the remarkable success of science? This is the explanationist defense of scientific realism, the “ultimate argument.” Kyle Stanford starts here and, using the history of theorizing about biological inheritance (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  7.  43
    An Evolutionary Paradox for Prosocial Behavior.Patrick Forber & Rory Smead - 2014 - Journal of Philosophy 111 (3):151-166.
    We investigate how changes to the payoffs of cooperative behavior affect the evolutionary dynamics. Paradoxically, the larger the benefits of cooperation, the less likely it is to evolve. This holds true even in cases where cooperation is strictly dominant. Increasing the benefits from prosocial behavior has two effects: first, in some circumstances it promotes the evolution of spite; and second, it can decrease the strength of selection leading to nearly neutral evolution of strategies. In light of these results we must (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  8.  30
    The Perils of Tweaking: How to Use Macrodata to Set Parameters in Complex Simulation Models.Brian Epstein & Patrick Forber - 2013 - Synthese 190 (2):203-218.
    When can macroscopic data about a system be used to set parameters in a microfoundational simulation? We examine the epistemic viability of tweaking parameter values to generate a better fit between the outcome of a simulation and the available observational data. We restrict our focus to microfoundational simulations—those simulations that attempt to replicate the macrobehavior of a target system by modeling interactions between microentities. We argue that tweaking can be effective but that there are two central risks. First, tweaking risks (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  9.  55
    Spandrels and a Pervasive Problem of Evidence.Patrick Forber - 2009 - Biology and Philosophy 24 (2):247-266.
  10.  34
    Can There Be Stochastic Evolutionary Causes?Patrick Forber & Kenneth Reisman - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (5):616-627.
    Do evolutionary processes such as selection and random drift cause evolutionary change, or are they merely convenient ways of describing or summarizing it? Philosophers have lined up on both sides of this question. One recent defense (Reisman and Forber 2005) of the causal status of selection and drift appeals to a manipulability theory of causation. Yet, even if one accepts manipulability, there are still reasons to doubt that genetic drift, in particular, is genuinely causal. We will address two challenges to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  11.  23
    Conjecture and Explanation: A Reply to Reydon.Patrick Forber - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 43 (1):298-301.
  12.  1
    Confirmation and Explaining How Possible.Patrick Forber - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 41 (1):32-40.
  13.  4
    The Evolution of Spite, Recognition, and Morality.Patrick Forber & Rory Smead - 2016 - Philosophy of Science 83 (5):884-896.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  43
    Reconceiving Eliminative Inference.Patrick Forber - 2011 - Philosophy of Science 78 (2):185-208.
  15. Confirmation and Explaining How Possible.Patrick Forber - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 41 (1):32-40.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16.  2
    Conjecture and Explanation: A Reply to Reydon.Patrick Forber - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 43 (1):298-301.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  17.  52
    Introduction: A Primer on Adaptationism.Patrick Forber - 2009 - Biology and Philosophy 24 (2):155-159.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18.  24
    Nietzsche Was No Darwinian.Patrick Forber - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):369–382.
    John Richardson (2002, 2004) argues that Nietzsche’s use of teleological notions, such as the “will to power” and psychological “drives,” can be naturalized within the Darwinian framework of natural selection. Although this ambitious project has merit, the Darwinian framework does not provide the strong teleology necessary to interpret Nietzsche’s explanatory project. Examining the logic of selection, the conceptual limitations on biological functions, and the evidential demands that must be met to deploy evolutionary theory show that Nietzsche’s explanatory project does not (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19. 10. Philosophy of Chemistry.Cristina Bicchieri, Jason McKenzie Alexander, Kevin T. Kelly, Kevin Js Zollman, Malcolm R. Forster, Predrag Šustar, Patrick Forber, Kenneth Reisman, Jay Odenbaugh & Yoichi Ishida - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (5).
  20.  58
    Modeling Scientific Evidence: The Challenge of Specifying Likelihoods.Patrick Forber - 2012 - In Henk W. de Regt (ed.), Epsa Philosophy of Science: Amsterdam 2009. Springer. pp. 55--65.
    Evidence is an objective matter. This is the prevailing view within science, and confirmation theory should aim to capture the objective nature of scientific evidence. Modeling an objective evidence relation in a probabilistic framework faces two challenges: the probabilities must have the right epistemic foundation, and they must be specifiable given the hypotheses and data under consideration. Here I will explore how Sober's approach to confirmation handles these challenges of foundation and specification. In particular, I will argue that the specification (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  4
    Of Silence and Denial: Sober on Ockham’s Razors.Patrick Forber - forthcoming - Metascience:1-5.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  60
    Testing the Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution.Patrick Forber - unknown
    MacDonald and Kreitman (1991) propose a test of the neutral mutationrandom drift (NM-RD) hypothesis, the central claim of the neutral theory of molecular evolution. The test involves generating predictions from the NM-RD hypothesis about patterns of molecular substitutions. Alternative selection hypotheses predict that the data will deviate from the predictions of the NM-RD hypothesis in specifiable ways. To conduct the test Mac- Donald and Kreitman examine the evolutionary dynamics of the alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) gene in three species of Drosophila. The (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  17
    Biological Inheritance and Cultural Evolution in Nietzsche's Genealogy.Patrick Forber - 2013 - Journal of Nietzsche Studies 44 (2):329-341.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  10
    Evolution and the Classification of Social Behavior.Patrick Forber & Rory Smead - 2015 - Biology and Philosophy 30 (3):405-421.
    Recent studies in the evolution of cooperation have shifted focus from altruistic to mutualistic cooperation. This change in focus is purported to reveal new explanations for the evolution of prosocial behavior. We argue that the common classification scheme for social behavior used to distinguish between altruistic and mutualistic cooperation is flawed because it fails to take into account dynamically relevant game-theoretic features. This leads some arguments about the evolution of cooperation to conflate dynamical scenarios that differ regarding the basic conditions (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  21
    Meeting Report: First ISHPSSB Off-Year Workshop. [REVIEW]Melinda Fagan, Patrick Forber, Vivette GarcÍa Deister, Matthew H. Haber, Andrew Hamilton & Grant Yamashita - 2005 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (4):927-929.
  26.  15
    Grounding the Big Picture.Patrick Forber - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (4):913-923.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Nietzsche Was No Darwinian.Patrick Forber - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):369-382.
    John Richardson argues that Nietzsche’s use of teleological notions, such as the “will to power” and psychological “drives,” can be naturalized within the Darwinian framework of natural selection. Although this ambitious project has merit, the Darwinian framework does not provide the strong teleology necessary to interpret Nietzsche’s explanatory project. Examining the logic of selection, the conceptual limitations on biological functions, and the evidential demands that must be met to deploy evolutionary theory show that Nietzsche’s explanatory project does not cohere with (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography